I’ve been working under the assumption that by crossing a ducksfoot and an abc, both of which have only recessive genes, that there are no normal dominant genes in the mix. Therefore, i’ve been assuming that whenever i see a “normal” leaf structure, it had to be a mix of the two recessive genes. If that’s not the case, and by the results i’m seeing in this sample of 18 seedlings it may not be, then maybe there’s more than a single set of genes that determine leaf structure. That might explain why a cross of a freakshow and an abc or a freakshow and a ducksfoot doesn’t result in a “normal leaf” at the F1 like a ducksfoot and an abc does.
i saw you describe that breeding technique earlier in your thread, but didn’t understand where you were going with it until now. Thank you.
Instead of crossing the F1 back to the Spyderweb, which is an auto ducksfoot, perhaps i should just isolate the autos in this batch. Theoretically, 50% of these should be autos. Should i then cross those back to the F1 or do something else?
@PineTarBastard I can say nothing from personal experience about breeding mutants. I’m just getting my feet wet with my first F1 crosses. I have photos from the breeder though (don’t want to share publicly for copywrite reasons if there are any). The terminology they use is “25% Bastard 25% webbed and 50% standard.”
As I understand it, every mutant has a normal growth pattern too. For example in this Menthol Skunk line I just sprouted, I have 2 separate versions of Menthol Skunk. The heavily serrated phenos, and the freaky phenos. Here’s what I mean.
The heavily serrated phenos in this line are the ‘normal’ cannabis plants. Now if I take a male and female that look heavily serrated and not pinnate like the crazy ones, the F4 generation is going to be mostly heavily serrated imo. The pinnate ones though if I take a male and female, crossing those together I believe those seeds will be mostly pinnate. Now ask me what happens you keep crossing a pinnate with a heavily serrated over and over? Idk not there yet haha
I’m glad I described it then. Once I understood the brilliance of it, it clicked to me. It takes one more filial generation but locking in specific traits from one side of the cross is exactly what I want to do.
Freakshow lines are specifically weird even among the mutants because of the way it expresses in the F1 generation. None of the other mutants seem to do that which is strange but also a wonderful breeding tool. It makes Freakshow the perfect mutant to learn how to breed well with. You can see lots of traits before the plants ever begin to flower. You’ll also know ahead of time which are male and female. Males look freaky and females look standard, as long as the freakshow was the female in the cross. Something weird it’s like a female only trait but you can get male freakshows once it’s completely isolated which is quite odd. We need more people breeding it to figure everything out.
First I must ask what your goal is here? It sounds like you want to cross the Spyderweb(autoduck) with your Pine Tar Bastard(PTB?)? Do you have any veg or clones maintained or would you have to sprout more seeds?
This kind of thing sounds incredibly difficult to do with just 1 pairing. Myself I would look to make a ‘normal’ combined mutant and then work on introducing auto genetics into it. The thing with autos is that they make the “Sebring” pedigree impossible because you can’t hang onto the P1 until after the BX1s are made. The BX1 (which would be your auto) and the P1 would be the original Spyderweb autoduck.
If those are an F1 between Subterfuge#1 x Spyderweb I actually wouldn’t assume that 50% should be auto. True autos are yet another recessive. I would expect some to be semi-auto, and those would be good candidates for full-auto progeny. Either way, if you have no other plants to work with, I would actually say to continue the line to F2 and hope you can sprout enough to find some webbed bastards and then I would hunt for a separate auto to work with to make it auto. I wouldn’t rely on getting 3 recessives in this small of a pheno hunt. Ideally I would want to sprout like 500 seeds if I was looking for a full-auto webbed bastard, in every seed generation I do. I mean fygtree found 8 in 100 (2 males and 6 females) for just combined webbed bastards. I do realize that you’re foundation is an auto mutant to begin with, but that’s kind of what makes it so difficult to breed with. If you don’t have other autos lined up at the same time, the timing becomes trickier(storing pollen).
I guess ultimately it depends on what you’re going for.
I haven’t grown out any Freakshows but have seen photos of crosses with other mutants and there seems to be a merging of genes in the F1, where as I haven’t noticed anything of the sort when ducksfoot and abc’s are bred together. It’s interesting that you noticed that some of the traits are linked to sex, even before the plant is sexually mature. That’s a ground breaking observation.
The 19Z is a cross of Subterfuge#1 and Spyderweb. I haven’t made any auto crosses with the PTB. I’d want to work the PTB into an IBL before attempting anything like that. I chose Subterfuge and Spyderweb because 1)both are heavily worked IBLs, and 2) I wanted to work with lines where the leaf traits were both recessive, as i believed that i could widen the selection process at the F2 level. Since I can’t grow out hundreds of plants all at once, by using ducks to breed with, if i saw any ducks at the F2 level, i believed i could simply eliminate any ducks that popped up, and use the rest, whether they had an abc leaf or a regular leaf. That would triple the number of plants i could use. So instead of having 6.25% with both an auto gene and an abc gene, i would have 18.75% having the auto characteristic and an abc gene, even if the abc gene wasn’t being expressed. Because once i had the auto gene fixed, selecting for the abc leaf would be easy and i could also have more plants to select from for other characteristics as well. At least that was the plan until today. I’m still dumbstruck that none of the 18 seedlings had the bastard leaf.
I apologize, but i don’t understand. The Subterfuge was my choice for the abc leaf characteristic and the Spyderweb was my choice for the auto flower characteristic.
I’m sorry, I probably didn’t explain what i had done when i made the F2s. I was cleaning up my seed stash and i had a bunch of immature crappy seeds in my 19Z stash and threw them into my worm bin to see if any of them would sprout. To my surprise, i had about twenty sprout. Most of them had helmet heads and 12 didn’t make it Out of the 8 survivors, 1 was a ducksfoot, which i got rid of, 1 was an abc and the rest had normal looking leaves. I let them go 45 days under 24/0 hour light, and only one was an autoflower and it had the normal leaf structure. The autoflower was a female, so i hit it with the original 19Z F1 pollen. Since i crossed a fully auto F2 female with a 50/50 photo/auto F1 pollen, 50% of the progeny should be an autoflower. I hope that makes more sense. Sorry for any confusion, and thank you for helping me work through this.
I think I understand now your motivations for this cross! The thing is, in the F1 cross you’re only getting dominant traits which are still dominant even though the plant looks recessive. The dominant traits just got covered up by the recessive showing itself but it’s still in there, and it shows up in the F1 generation.
As I understand it, the only mutant cross known to have mutants in the F1 generation is Mnogolistka x ABC. It’s under the creations page on TLT’s website if you want to have a look. It seems Mnogolistka and ABC may have similar origins to have an F1 show mutant leaves.
I get that now that you’ve explained it! I think your method for trying to find the ‘combinatory mutant’ may not be the most efficient. When it comes to crosses like these, I think the traditional pedigree for finding mutants is the best version(P1+P2=F1 → F2 → F3). The unfortunate part is when you’re hunting through F2s… you really need to go through some decent numbers to find those outliers. If you’re limited by plant numbers just plant what you can when you can and hope to find what you’re looking for in the first couple of runs.
In my mind, we either find our desired plant through meticulous breeding, or by running enough numbers to find the outliers. I believe modern hybrids should be bred this way as well, but I doubt that will happen. It’s under this mode of thinking that I will do my breeding work. I am going to try to do both: meticulous breeding and running decently large numbers (300 sounds good to me).
This clears this up even more. Now I understand what you meant with F2xF1 with the F2 being auto. I think this further reaffirms the point I made earlier, that once you select an F2 that doesn’t have a mutant leaf type, your F3 aren’t going to have ABC show up, unless you can run large numbers to find the outliers. I think you’re incorrect about your progeny. 75% of them should be full-auto. You have 100% auto mixed with a 50/50. As long as the F1 male showed semi-auto traits you should have 75% of those should be full auto with 25% being semi-auto. Only rarely should you see a normal flowering plant with that pedigree. The big question here is if the male F1 showed semi-auto traits. If he did then I would definitely seek to validate the 75/25 split. Unfortunately, the way things have gone, I do believe you’ve bred out the ABC and Duck leaf types. I may be mistaken and hope I am, but I think once you removed the F2s you destined the line to be ‘normal’.
I want to take the time to point out what I’ve learned about auto genetics. I would say there’s 3 tiers of autos. You have full-auto which is where the plant has a finite amount of days before flowering is complete. Then you have the semi-auto where the plant almost acts like it’s going to flower under any light cycle, but won’t actually initiate flowering until the light cycle is dropped back to 12/12. Then it will flower extremely quickly (7-8 weeks). Then you have the non-auto which is a normal photoperiod plant. From my understanding, you can only get a full-auto from either breeding full-autos x full-autos, OR a semi-auto x semi-auto. In the semi-auto offspring a portion will be full-auto and most will be semi-auto. It gets to be a nightmare for me to think about what you would need to have a fully combined mutant line that’s full-auto. FYI, the pedigree for breeding auto genetics into any strain and stabilize it is the same exact pedigree that mutants require. I try not to think about multiple growth traits and just think about leaf types and be blissfully ignorant of how stupid the punnett squares could get lol… especially when you throw mutant and auto into the same sentence
Again, remember that I’m just regurgitating what I’ve read elsewhere. I don’t have any real world knowledge for breeding, yet. That said, I have done quite a bit of research to make sure that I know what I’m talking about so I try not to mislead anyone.
I think theres a misunderstanding here. All simple recessive genes work the same way. So take auto for example. Cross it to a regular plant and all F1s have 1 hidden copy of the gene. You cross 2 of those. Those F2s break down like this… 25% full autos, 50% 1 hidden auto gene, 25% have NOTHING. This means that when you remove the autos from the F2 generation, 66% of the remaining regular looking plants have 1 copy, and 33% have nothing. Think of each of these recessives as their own thing, on their own place in the plant, that dont really affect each other. So when you stack genes and run the F2s, you want a ton of seedlings(I use 72 seed trays for this. sometimes 4 trays). You really need to either find the combo right there, or backcross to F1(the only plants we know have everything). Especially with 3 recessives, your almost certain to lose genes if you move to F3 without finding everything in F2. Hitting 66% 3 times is hard, but doing it for a male and female is really not likely. Using plants that hit some genes would give a better shot at least. I guess what I’m trying to say is that your F2 abc plants have a 66% chance of also having one copy of web hiding. The genes aren’t mutually exclusive, and if they are, the whole thing wont work anyway.
Hello btw. If you breed mutants, your cool with me
if they found 8 out of 100 duckwebs thats well within the range of typical variance to assume both are simple recessive. If you ran millions, you’d expect 1 out of 16 to hit. Which is about 6 out of 100. Thats why you want to use seed trays and run lots.
If pinetar used a pollen donor with 1 copy of auto and pollenated a full blown auto, hes right, he should have half auto, half 1 copy auto in the offspring.
@RandomHumanoid - Thanks for chiming in! You seem to know quite a bit more about those hidden genes and which ones will show and that sort of thing. Your explanation summed up perfectly one of the thoughts I was trying to iterate to PineTarBastard. I’m thrilled some us mutant freaks are coming together to figure out how all this works. I would know nothing without the community here, so thank you for being one of the cogs that makes this engine propel towards it’s destination.
Exactly! Thanks for summing this up. I believe most good recessive plants can be found in similar ratios, regardless of the line or outcross. Once we start getting past F4 though I think things should be much more uniform and those outliers will take larger numbers to find. Just a guess.
@Heather420 - Where do I begin? Do you know anything about it’s lineage? To me it looks like it may have some kind of pH problem or something. None of my mutants have had the crinkling up of the leaf edge. That seems like an issue of some kind to me. Is your soil mix too hot possibly? Maybe heat damage as well from intense light. The new leaf growth is quite surprising. It looks like a mutant but I’m not seeing normal internodal growth, as well as absent leaves on the one side. Can you give anymore details? soil mix, lights, temps?
I stand corrected. At first this confused the heck of out of me but then I thought about auto as a single trait punnett square and it made sense…
Let’s say auto is “aa” with photoperiod being “AA”… If you’re taking aa x Aa, the results should be, aa, aA, Aa, and aa… 50% full auto, 25% semi-auto, and 25% photoperiod. Is this correct?
It counts for posts pics and joining in. It could end up being a mutant, but sometimes when they take forever to surface like that, they come out goofy, but then straighten out after a little while.
As much as I like to believe weed makes me better at everything, it does not. Especially when it comes to thinking threw some of this stuff. I still do it tho
multileafXfreakshowF2 that missed the freakshow genes, but hit the multileaf. Its going to make for an easy trim job.
Wow, you said that was fast but I would never have thought this fast! And that’s even after you’ve crossed it with Freakshow. Dayum. Good on ya bro!
If anyone asked me, I would say those look like freakshow flowers, but this is coming from someone who’s never seen multileaf either. Either way a fantastic specimen! Thanks for sharing her.
I also have to point out that there are some leaves near the tips of the buds that resemble freakshow a little bit. It could be part of multileaf though it’s hard to say. Either way it’s got an impressive calyx ratio on it. I hope it turns out stellar!
Freakshows grow slowly in veg, but flower really early. So they didn’t slow things down much. I got a couple sisters next to her that hit freakshow with a few extra fingers, and they are way smaller, but still budding out almost the same speed. Then i have a couple more that got a couple extra fingers, but missed the other mutations. One of those is going to be really quick but heavy yielding. The other one throws short curly pistols like my origonal freakshows and has small buds, and my F2 freakshows are better about that, so that nasty lil trait can be weeded out easy. Its a fun time of year thats for sure.
The leaves on multileafs change up as they flower, so the ones closer to the buds aren’t as “multi” lookin. She could also have some freakiness hiding tho.
Under my original hypothesis, running the Punnet Square calculations, if ducksfoot is represented by ‘dd’ and bastard leaf is represented by ‘bb’ and i cross the two together, the F1 should be db, db, db, db. Let’s assume that whenever we have a ‘db’ combination, the leaf looks like a normal cannabis leaf, but only contains the split recessive pair. When we cross the F1 siblings, db x db, the resulting F2 generation should be 25%dd, 25% bb, and 50% db. And theoretically, if i continue to cross the ‘db’ pairs out to F3, F4, etc, then results should continue to be 25%dd, 25% bb and 50% db at every generation regardless how far we go. Since i am limited to how many plants i can grow and limited to how big they can get indoors, and thus limited to small seeds runs, this seemed like the best method for me to follow to achieve my goals.
In my real life example where i had an auto female with what looked like a normal cannabis leaf, her genes actually were the split pair ‘db’. I crossed her with pollen from the original F1, which was also the split pair ‘db’, the result should have been 25%dd, 25%bb, and 50%db.
But the 18 seedlings aren’t showing any bb pairings. It could just be a statistical anomaly due to the small sample size. I planted out the remaining 10 viable seeds yesterday(and a few crap seeds in the worm bin ) so i’ll know more in a weeks time. But if i still don’t see the 25/25/50 ratio showing itself, then we must assume that my hypothesis is incorrect, and something else is going on.
Thats just not how it works. F1s have “db” and look normal, but those things aren’t connected. It doesn’t carry like that where every regular looking plant has both genes for every generation, that only happens in F1 because those plants have full on mutant parents. Once you get to F2 you have regular plants that are only d or only b or neither, and you cant tell them apart. Recessive genes and how they work have been understood for a long time. I know it sucks your already underway on your operation, and I hate to be the guy telling you its wrong. I’m just trying to help out.
I’m still dumbstruck that none of the 18 seedlings had the bastard leaf.
Out of the 8 survivors, 1 was a ducksfoot, which i got rid of, 1 was an abc and the rest had normal looking leaves. I let them go 45 days under 24/0 hour light, and only one was an autoflower and it had the normal leaf structure. The autoflower was a female, so i hit it with the original 19Z F1 pollen. Since i crossed a fully auto F2 female with a 50/50 photo/auto F1 pollen, 50% of the progeny should be an autoflower. I hope that makes more sense. Sorry for any confusion, and thank you for helping me work through this.
